ArticleBulletin of the World Health Organization2024
Assessing the WHO-UNICEF primary health-care measurement framework; Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
Article in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality of Care for Hypertension in Primary Health Care in South Africa: Cross-Sectional Feasibility Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Policy approaches to health system performance assessment.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To assess the availability of information on indicators of the World Health Organization and United Nations Children's Fund primary health-care measurement framework in Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka and to outline the opportunities for and challenges to using the framework in these countries. Methods: We reviewed global and national data repositories for quantitative indicators of the framework and conducted a desk review of country documents for qualitative indicators in February-April 2023. We assessed data sources and cross-sectional survey tools to suggest possible sources of information on framework indicators that were not currently reported in the countries. We also identified specific indicators outside the framework on which information is collected in the countries and which could be used to measure primary health-care performance. Findings: Data on 54% (32/59) of the quantitative indicators were partially or completely available for the countries, ranging from 41% (24/59) in Pakistan to 64% (38/59) in Nepal. Information on 41% (66/163) of the qualitative subindicators could be acquired through desk reviews of country-specific documents. Information on input indicators was more readily available than on process and output indicators. The feasibility of acquiring information on the unreported indicators was moderate to high through adaptation of data collection instruments. Conclusion: The primary health-care measurement framework provides a platform to readily assess and track the performance of primary health care. Countries should improve the completeness, quality and use of existing data for strengthening of primary health care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.